The proposed car park extension at Port MacDonnell will not go ahead following the clean-up of dredging works at the seaside town foreshore.

Grant District councillors have resolved council will support the Department for Infrastructure and Transport (DIT) to return the grassed area to its original state.

The recommendation to defer the decision to install a car park for consideration as part of the 2023-24 Budget process, noting that preliminary design and consultation is required, was removed and did not form part of the motion.

The recommendation comes after the matter was initially raised at council’s meeting on September 19 when Cr Gillian Clayfield moved that council consult with DIT and request it place a hold on removing the base until such time as council staff had presented a further report.

Council’s acting works manager Mathew Little along with asset and procurement officer Tessa Campbell tabled the report for discussion.

“DIT has been dredging the bay at Port MacDonnell and have used a grassed area on the foreshore near the boat ramp to store and dry out the dredged material in geofabric bags,” Mr Little said.

Around 120,000 tonnes of sand and organic material has been dredged from the harbour into bio-bags to dry ready for removal to local landfill.

As a result, the department is to return the grassed area to its original state with the total cost of remediation works being paid for by the department.

“DIT will cover 100% of the costs associated with the remediation works. Council will have no financial obligation, risk, or responsibility in this project,” Mr Little said.

“The anticipated cost to hydroseed the original area of 10,000sqm is expected to be no greater than $15,000.

“The cost of watering the area is unknown, however it is not expected to bring to the total cost to a value greater than $20,000.”

However, Mr Little said if the area was not re-seeded, dust suppression measures would be required and this would be at the cost of council.

Time constraints was highlighted as a potential factor to the delay in the works.

The chosen method for the remediation works is to use a reseeding method called hydroseeding.

“If the remediation works are carried out during summer, November or later, there will be limited rainfall to assist in the watering of the hydroseeded area,” Mr Little said.

“Any delays may cause dust issues for the residents and any visitors to the area.

“A liquid solution, containing grass seeds, mulch and fertiliser, is sprayed on the desired surface area and once sprayed the area must be watered at regular intervals to ensure germination and steady growth occurs.”

DIT asked council’s Works Department to find a contractor that provides a hydroseeding service, select an appropriate type of grass seed and provide quotes.

“The Works Department has completed this and DIT has the information required to engage and start the hydroseeding,” Mr Little said.

Meanwhile, the report also investigated gravel and sealed surfaces for the proposed car park.

“A gravel surface is not recommended due to the ongoing dust suppression and maintenance required,” Mr Little said.

“Council would need to resource the dust suppression works internally and pay for the water to suppress the dust, or engage a contractor to complete the maintenance. This would be an ongoing cost to council.”

Mr Little said the cost of a two-coat seal of a car park at 5000 square metres was $139,319, however the site requiring remediation works is 10,000 square metres.

“Preliminary works would be required, excavation of existing material, installation of new base material, compaction … and sealing of the material would also be needed to construct the car park,” he said.

Council utilised Gambier Earth Movers (GEM) to assist in investigating the proposal.

“GEM determined the current base layer cannot be used in its current state and so has no real advantage,” Mr Little said.

“DIT agreed to pay an amount that is the equivalent to the cost to hydroseed the area. Council will have to pay the remaining amount.”

CEO Darryl Whicker said while the car park was a good opportunity to pursue, in reality it was not going to be cost saving.

“The area is 10,000sqm but the car park area proposed is $140,000 for 5000sqm, meaning that half the area will need to be reseeded,” he said.

“So, half of that potential cost saving from DIT of around $15,000 would go on to reseeding.”

In response, Cr Gillian Clayfield said the matter was “brought up the wrong way”.

“We have not gone through the processes we would normally do,” she said.

“It was not in our budget, the town was not consulted, the area is far too big to be made into a car park and will impact on the area that was to be used as a memorial wall and will detract from the area having it all asphalt.”

Mayor Richard Sage had raised the matter at the previous meeting which was cause for discussion.

It was also noted that council is currently in caretaker period.

The car park proposal would constitute a ‘designated decision’ which is prohibited during caretaker period.

Although a designated decision made by council during an election period is invalid, an exemption can be granted by the Minister.

Despite the opportunity to seek exemption from the Minister the recommendation to not proceed with the proposal had the full support of council.

Maintenance, environmental impacts, existing plans, community consultation and conflicting projects were also taken into consideration.